Dharmik Shikshan

Here's a comprehensive summary of the provided Jain text, "Dharmik Shikshan" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, in English:

The book "Dharmik Shikshan" by Sukhlal Sanghavi, published by Z_Darshan_ane_Chintan_Part_2, delves into the complex debate surrounding religious education. The author identifies two opposing camps regarding its necessity: one that strongly advocates for it and another that is indifferent or even actively opposes it. This societal divide, the author notes, is not unique to the Jain community but is prevalent across most societies.

Sanghavi seeks to understand the reasons behind this opposition. He posits that opponents are not necessarily against education in general or religion itself. Instead, their objection often stems from specific practices or teachings presented in the name of religion, which they feel hinder rather than promote humanity. Conversely, proponents of religious education, according to Sanghavi, tend to focus on imparting rote lessons and traditional rituals. Their motivation often lacks a lived, personal experience of religion, but rather stems from inherited traditions, societal pressure to maintain these rituals, and the influence of scholars and religious leaders who emphasize them.

The author observes that even those who oppose current forms of religious education acknowledge the need for a life of high moral character and refined sensibilities. They desire a life where individuals maintain honesty in their personal and social dealings and do not compromise societal or national progress for petty self-interest. The key difference lies in how this is achieved. The opposing group accepts education that genuinely enriches life and cultivates noble qualities. They reject educational approaches that offer little promise of such enrichment. Thus, Sanghavi argues, the opposition to religious education implicitly accepts the necessity of religious education.

Similarly, those who are strongly in favor of religious education, despite their insistence on specific texts and rituals, are still interested in seeing life enriched with noble qualities. This leads Sanghavi to the conclusion that both opposing sides share a common ground: the aspiration for a higher and more cultured human life. The debate, therefore, should focus on this shared aspiration, and contentious elements should be left to the inclination and thought processes of the learner, rather than imposing rigid, exclusive views or arrangements.

Sanghavi then critically examines the arguments of those who favor religious texts and rituals. He states that if proponents of these traditions could demonstrate through their own lives that religious followers are more truthful, act as they speak, live simple lives, and that their religious practices connect humanity more broadly, then no one would have a reason to object to their traditional education. However, history, he contends, shows the opposite. He points out that communities or castes that have received extensive traditional religious education have often become more divided, hypocritical, and fearful than others. He cites the example of Brahmins and Hindu society, often seen as deeply religious and ritualistic, as being more fragmented and exhibiting more hypocrisy and fear.

The author further argues that instead of religion fostering greater unity, a proliferation of religious education has often led to increased division. He uses Islam and Christianity as examples, suggesting that while their traditional education might have unified certain segments, it has also created significant opposition and division within the larger human community. He posits that while a religion might achieve some internal unity, it often commits the "great sin" of making vast groups of people feel entirely opposed to it.

Moving beyond inter-religious division, Sanghavi also addresses the internal state of religious sects. Even if a particular sect's traditional education fostered a simple, honest, and selfless life for its followers, the opposition would still have grounds for objection if the leaders of these sects are found to be living ostentatious lives, promoting their extravagance in the name of religion, and misusing the resources of their followers for personal gain rather than their welfare, education, or self-reliance. He criticizes religious leaders for shirking physical labor while enjoying its fruits, and for avoiding responsibility while expecting others to fulfill their duties towards them, much like kings. He also laments the tendency of leading figures within sects to lack virtue and seek wealth with minimal effort. In such a climate of dishonesty and self-serving behavior, Sanghavi asserts, any attempt to promote rigid religious education will be met with the inner and outer resistance of independent thinkers.

Sanghavi suggests a more prudent and safer path forward: to focus on religious principles that both parties agree upon, and to consciously establish an educational framework around these shared elements.

He identifies two key aspects of such agreed-upon religious principles: conduct (Vartana) and thought (Vichar).

Regarding conduct, Sanghavi asserts that to teach virtue, one must live it. Virtue cannot be taught solely through words; it fades when verbalized and naturally influences others when genuinely embodied. Therefore, if a society or institution aims to cultivate virtue, it must have individuals who genuinely embody it. Without such exemplary individuals, attempting to teach virtue is mere hypocrisy. Parents or elders wishing to shape children must first embody that character themselves; otherwise, they should not harbor hopes of it being instilled in their offspring. Institutions cannot create an atmosphere of virtue by hiring superficial or inauthentic teachers. Virtue is a matter of practice, and it is through sincere actions, rather than mere imitation, that true values take root.

Regarding thought, which is also referred to as knowledge (Gnan), Sanghavi believes that any institution can genuinely foster and nurture this aspect. The primary path for any institution in religious education is through knowledge and thought. Institutions that provide rich resources, such as comprehensive libraries and lectures by scholarly thinkers on various subjects, will find success. However, the central element must be the teacher who embodies knowledge and thought, possessing a receptive and constantly evolving perspective. Institutions fortunate enough to have such teachers will inevitably see the natural spread and growth of religious education in terms of fostering thought.

When presented with the opportunity to learn, students are naturally curious. An institution's primary duty is to identify and nurture this curiosity. This involves providing access to knowledge and creating an environment for intellectual engagement. However, institutions often fail to capitalize on this by not focusing on what is possible for the student to achieve or become. Instead, they overemphasize aspects of tradition that neither the student nor the teacher is genuinely interested in, leading to a loss for the institution. This stifles the awakening of potential thought and fails to generate interest in impractical traditions, leaving individuals indifferent.

Therefore, Sanghavi proposes the following solutions for the challenges of religious education in any institution:

1. Make ritualistic or traditional education optional, not compulsory.
2. Do not attempt to teach virtue through words alone if it is not genuinely lived. If the means to teach it through lived example are absent, it is better to remain silent on the matter.
3. Provide the best possible education on philosophical concepts, from historical, comparative, and formal perspectives, tailored to the students' capabilities. This, he argues, should be considered sufficient religious education. There is no disagreement with this approach to religious education; it is feasible for institutions, useful for bridging different sect beliefs, and essential for dispelling false superstitions.